<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">Many thanks to John, and for the correction--by that time of day on a Friday it might better be called Fried-Day.<br><br>I've heard from the cataloger in question--collaboration is in progress. As to "spes", I'll look again, but I checked the text in a modern edition, and the word <i>is</i> "speciem". Perhaps a typo? Foul case error? - Richard<br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><font face="'courier new', monospace">RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY</font><div><font face="'courier new', monospace">BROWN UNIVERSITY :: PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912 :: 401-863-1187</font></div><div><span style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><</span><a href="mailto:RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace" target="_blank">Richard_Noble@Br</a><span style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><a href="http://own.edu" target="_blank">own.edu</a></span><span style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">></span></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 2:55 PM, John Lancaster <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jjlancaster@me.com" target="_blank">jjlancaster@me.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="font-family:Bell MT" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div style="font-family:Bell MT"><span style="font-family:Bell MT">I'd suggest that a semi-colon or period
should follow Hain - that is, that the Hain reference was not intended
to relate to the reading of leaf 2/1r, line 1.<br><br>The reading is on
the first leaf of the second gathering, at least according to the
collation given in Bod-Inc and BSB, and from the digitized BSB copy.<br><br>That
BSB copy clearly has "spēs" with a final "s", not a variant final form
of "m".<br><br>So perhaps there were a couple of press-corrections.<br><br>But
aside from the ambiguous Hain reference, the note would seem likely to
be accurate.<br><br>John Lancaster<br></span><span>
</span><br><blockquote style="border:0px none" type="cite"><div style="margin:30px 25px 10px 25px" class="m_-2179109926641019363__pbConvHr"><div style="width:100%;border-top:2px solid #edf1f4;padding-top:10px"> <div style="display:inline-block;white-space:nowrap;vertical-align:middle;width:49%">
<a href="mailto:richard_noble@brown.edu" style="color:#485664!important;padding-right:6px;font-weight:500;text-decoration:none!important" target="_blank">Noble, Richard</a></div> <div style="display:inline-block;white-space:nowrap;vertical-align:middle;width:48%;text-align:right"> <font color="#909AA4"><span style="padding-left:6px">January
6, 2017 at 12:43 PM</span></font></div> </div></div><div><div class="h5"><div style="color:#909aa4;margin-left:24px;margin-right:24px" class="m_-2179109926641019363__pbConvBody"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small" class="gmail_default">[Subject
designed to facilitate instant deletion by those to whom it means
nothing]</div><div style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small" class="gmail_default">I
am puzzled by LC's note in its record for Thomas Aquinas, Sentencia
libri de anima (Venice: Renner, 1472):</div><div style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small" class="gmail_default">
Agrees with Hain, differs from Pellechet, p. [21], line 1: LC
"spēs", Pellechet "opēs".</div><div style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small" class="gmail_default">Pellechet
does indeed quote the first line of that leaf, as a kind of milepost
(it's the first leaf of the third gathering), and gives "opes"; but
Hain's entry has nothing to say about this leaf at all. I don't know
whether this is Pellechet misquoting, or accidentally turning up an
isolated press-variant. The correct reading is actually for the
contraction of "speciem"--the final "letter" is not "s" but the variant
final form of "m": the passage reads, without contractions, "Unde coacti
sunt ponere ideas per quarum participationem et res naturales specium
sortiuntur ...").</div><div style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small" class="gmail_default">Is
it worth trying to read this cataloger's mind? I'm working with this
record at present.</div><div style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div><div class="m_-2179109926641019363gmail_signature"><font face="'courier new', monospace">RICHARD
NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY</font><div><font face="'courier new', monospace">BROWN UNIVERSITY :: PROVIDENCE, R.I.
02912 :: <a href="tel:(401)%20863-1187" value="+14018631187" target="_blank">401-863-1187</a></font></div><div><span style="font-family:"courier new",monospace"><</span><a href="mailto:RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU" target="_blank">Richard_Noble@Br</a><span style="font-family:"courier new",monospace"><a href="http://own.edu" target="_blank">own.edu</a></span><span style="font-family:"courier new",monospace">></span></div></div></div>
</div>
</div></div></div></blockquote><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>